China Revs Up Title, director and release year? Title: World in the Balance: China Revs Up Director: Chris Schmidt Release Year: 2004
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
China is no longer a poor country. It may soon be the world’ largest economy, and it’s middle class of 300 million people are enjoying it. They want the “good life”, which includes shopping, buying cars, owning dishwashers, and etc. With this, China is using more steel than the U.S. and consumes more grain than the U.S. By having its tremendous middle class enjoying the “good life,” there will be environmental disaster. China is poisoning its atmosphere, destroying its forests, ruining its wildlife, and desertifying its country. What China is doing is important because what China does affects everybody on the planet.
China is trying to follow the American dream. The U.S. is currently the world’s biggest emitter of carbon dioxide, which is a greenhouse gas that can lead to global warming. Every Chinese family wants a car as a sign of wealth, and this means by that 2030 China could match the U.S. carbon emission, and that both U.S. and China will contribute more to global warming than all other nations combined. Additionally, cars in China have very low emission control standards. They would not meet the U.S. or Europe’s emission controls. There is no push for more effective pollution controls because that would raise the price of cars, which would decrease sales and people would lose jobs.
The cities in China are extremely polluted. It has seven of the world’s top ten most polluted cities, which leads to respiratory disease and mortality. There is particulate dust, sulfur, lead, carbon monoxide, and other poisons in the air.
China also has huge reserves for coal. Coal in general provides 70 percent of the energy used to generate electricity. With this, China’s energy consumption has grown. In 1980, China burned approximately 400 million tons of coal, but today it burns 1.3 billion tons.
China is becoming drier, and as crop yields are shrinking, China needs more food because the increase affluence means richer diet. Meat consumption in China has risen by 400 percent, and thus this means that they need to get their meat elsewhere.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
There are many sustainability problems this film draws out. A few of them include the effects of industrialization, rise in consumerism, urban living versus countryside, use of coal as a main source of energy, low standards for carbon emission, and etc. There is a wealth of issues that this film tackles, but most of these problems stem from an increase in affluence. China has gotten wealthy extremely fast, and this has led to all of these problems. With this wealth, China isn’t thinking twice about the way things should be done, such as conserving the environment, but the ways things can be done, which is using up its natural resources as fast as it possibly can simply for a monetary gain and political power.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I was most compelled by the statistics about their use of coal. This is because I can’t even fathom what 1.3 billion tons of coal even looks like and the environmental devastation it must cause.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
I understand why this film focuses on China, but in general, if any country has the money and power, they would probably do the same thing China is doing right now at probably the same pace. It’s easy pointing a finger at China and thinking that this is terrible, when in reality the U.S. has committed the same crimes, at a perhaps a slower rate. I think this film puts China in an extremely negative light, when in reality there are some practices that are better than the U.S. China is starting to ban disposable chopsticks and shopping bags in order to go green. China doesn’t have the obesity issue to the same extent that the U.S. has, which means that in general, their people aren’t consuming food in excess like the U.S. So although their diets become “richer”, it by no means matches the average American’s diet.
What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
This film compels me to seek about way China is trying to go green. Although some of its changes it does seek are more superficial, because really going green means changing their source of fuel and the way they consume, it is interesting what steps they are taking to “go green.”
Working at Ecovative Design, a company that sells a biodegradable and environmentally friendly replacement for packaging buffers, has taught me a lot about different country’s interest in becoming more sustainable. We definitely get a lot of companies in China that want to try to sell our product, even though we are not ready to become international just yet. Also, I believe the media in China covers our product more than other countries, except the U.S.
What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
The film best addresses people who are semi-aware of China’s situation, but not in extreme detail. The film fosters viewers to realize the massive extent of environmental damage China is doing in such a short amount of time. The film may make viewers think more about these environmental problems, but because this film is about China, I’m not too sure if viewers can actually feel empowered to change things.
What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
I believe the film suggests that China needs to stop doing what it’s doing at such a fast pace because what China does affects the entire planet.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
I believe if the film could have said ways in which America or European countries have cut down on their carbon emissions, it could suggest ways in which China could do the same.
Title, director and release year?
Title: World in the Balance: China Revs Up
Director: Chris Schmidt
Release Year: 2004
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
China is no longer a poor country. It may soon be the world’ largest economy, and it’s middle class of 300 million people are enjoying it. They want the “good life”, which includes shopping, buying cars, owning dishwashers, and etc. With this, China is using more steel than the U.S. and consumes more grain than the U.S. By having its tremendous middle class enjoying the “good life,” there will be environmental disaster. China is poisoning its atmosphere, destroying its forests, ruining its wildlife, and desertifying its country. What China is doing is important because what China does affects everybody on the planet.
China is trying to follow the American dream. The U.S. is currently the world’s biggest emitter of carbon dioxide, which is a greenhouse gas that can lead to global warming. Every Chinese family wants a car as a sign of wealth, and this means by that 2030 China could match the U.S. carbon emission, and that both U.S. and China will contribute more to global warming than all other nations combined. Additionally, cars in China have very low emission control standards. They would not meet the U.S. or Europe’s emission controls. There is no push for more effective pollution controls because that would raise the price of cars, which would decrease sales and people would lose jobs.
The cities in China are extremely polluted. It has seven of the world’s top ten most polluted cities, which leads to respiratory disease and mortality. There is particulate dust, sulfur, lead, carbon monoxide, and other poisons in the air.
China also has huge reserves for coal. Coal in general provides 70 percent of the energy used to generate electricity. With this, China’s energy consumption has grown. In 1980, China burned approximately 400 million tons of coal, but today it burns 1.3 billion tons.
China is becoming drier, and as crop yields are shrinking, China needs more food because the increase affluence means richer diet. Meat consumption in China has risen by 400 percent, and thus this means that they need to get their meat elsewhere.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
There are many sustainability problems this film draws out. A few of them include the effects of industrialization, rise in consumerism, urban living versus countryside, use of coal as a main source of energy, low standards for carbon emission, and etc. There is a wealth of issues that this film tackles, but most of these problems stem from an increase in affluence. China has gotten wealthy extremely fast, and this has led to all of these problems. With this wealth, China isn’t thinking twice about the way things should be done, such as conserving the environment, but the ways things can be done, which is using up its natural resources as fast as it possibly can simply for a monetary gain and political power.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I was most compelled by the statistics about their use of coal. This is because I can’t even fathom what 1.3 billion tons of coal even looks like and the environmental devastation it must cause.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
I understand why this film focuses on China, but in general, if any country has the money and power, they would probably do the same thing China is doing right now at probably the same pace. It’s easy pointing a finger at China and thinking that this is terrible, when in reality the U.S. has committed the same crimes, at a perhaps a slower rate. I think this film puts China in an extremely negative light, when in reality there are some practices that are better than the U.S. China is starting to ban disposable chopsticks and shopping bags in order to go green. China doesn’t have the obesity issue to the same extent that the U.S. has, which means that in general, their people aren’t consuming food in excess like the U.S. So although their diets become “richer”, it by no means matches the average American’s diet.
What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
This film compels me to seek about way China is trying to go green. Although some of its changes it does seek are more superficial, because really going green means changing their source of fuel and the way they consume, it is interesting what steps they are taking to “go green.”
Working at Ecovative Design, a company that sells a biodegradable and environmentally friendly replacement for packaging buffers, has taught me a lot about different country’s interest in becoming more sustainable. We definitely get a lot of companies in China that want to try to sell our product, even though we are not ready to become international just yet. Also, I believe the media in China covers our product more than other countries, except the U.S.
What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
The film best addresses people who are semi-aware of China’s situation, but not in extreme detail. The film fosters viewers to realize the massive extent of environmental damage China is doing in such a short amount of time. The film may make viewers think more about these environmental problems, but because this film is about China, I’m not too sure if viewers can actually feel empowered to change things.
What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
I believe the film suggests that China needs to stop doing what it’s doing at such a fast pace because what China does affects the entire planet.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
I believe if the film could have said ways in which America or European countries have cut down on their carbon emissions, it could suggest ways in which China could do the same.